About Me

Jim Killebrew has 40 years of clinical psychological work for people with intellectual disabilities, and experience teaching, administration, consulting, writing with multiple publications. Dr. Killebrew has attended four Universities and received advanced degrees. Southern Illinois University; Ph.D., Educational Psychology; University of Illinois at Springfield, Counseling Education; M.A., Human Development Counseling; Northeastern Oklahoma State University, B.A., Psychology and Sociology. Dr. Killebrew attended Lincoln Christian Seminary (Now Lincoln Christian University). Writing contributions have been accepted and published in several journals: Hospital & Community Psychiatry, The Lookout, and Christian Standard (multiple articles). He may be reached at Killebrewjb@aol.com.

Welcome to my Opinion Pages

Thanks for stopping by and reading some of my thoughts. I hope you will find an enjoyable adventure here on my pages.

The articles are only my opinion and are never meant to hurt anyone nor to downgrade any other person's ideas or opinions.

Scroll through the page and stop to read any of the articles you wish. If you like what you see leave a comment, then tell someone where they can find this site. If you don't like what you read then leave a comment reflecting your thoughts and I will read them when I visit the site from time to time.

Thanks again for stopping by.

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Freedom of speech

As the riots in Libya and
Egypt continued, and even expanded to other countries in the region, many were
proclaiming the cause was a YouTube video someone had posted that denigrated
Muhammad.The ensuing argument has
drifted into one tributary toward America's practice of ensuring its citizens
can engage in free speech.Some have taken
the issue in the direction of restricting that speech, while others have
forcefully voiced their opinion that freedom of speech should not be
abridged.My initial question was,
"I wonder if we are witnessing firsthand the beginnings of the decimation
of free speech in the United States?"

Perhaps some middle ground
opinion on the subject was expressed by others.Some people have stated they believe people have free speech, but should
not say things that might inflame others or hurt their feelings.That view maintains the individual has free
speech but should self-restrict voicing hurtful, inflammatory words that are
known to incite violent behavior.I
believe that too; a person may have freedom to say something but perhaps should
not say it for a variety of reasons.

In America we have enjoyed
a fairly well defined freedom of speech based on the First Amendment to the United
States Constitution:" Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or
the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government
for a redress of grievances."

When I am talking about
the American freedom of speech, it takes on a special meaning that has been
rare in the history of the world; and is rare in many parts of today's world.
What I think the American freedom of speech as afforded in our Constitution is
"freedom to speak without fear of retribution from the government."That is the reason the burning of the American
flag, redacting portions of the Holy Bible, Crucifixes sealed in a jar of human
urine are all repulsive and rejected by most reasonable people, but it is still
considered free speech in America.However, speaking out against the repulsiveness of the content of that
free speech is also consider free speech in America.Rather than people being punished for the
content of their free speech, they should be persuaded by reasonable debate to
consider alternatives.Repression only
allows the growth of totalitarianism.

Actually everybody in the
world has the freedom to speak any words that come to mind, but if you had
lived in Nazi Germany in the 1930's you might self-restrict that freedom to
either speak against Gestapo brutality against Jewish people, or for the humane
and equal treatment of the Jewish people because of the retribution of death
for each position. In the 1700's in the Colonies you were free to speak your
mind against the British King, but there was retribution for doing so;
sometimes even death. Our experiment in democracy has changed from the rule of
the king to the rule of for and by the people. The people decided we should
have freedom of speech without the fear of the government coming after us for
punishment.

Obviously, in other parts
of the world, that freedom is curtailed by those who are in power and refuse to
have anything spoken against them. We fought a Revolution and World Wars to
maintain that freedom of speech without retribution from the government. We have
grown to believe it is a fundamental right that has been granted by God through
the gift of choice He has endowed through His Grace. Can we abuse that right?Of course! But does it deserve the death
penalty? My belief is, No! At least not in this world.

The only time free speech
and choice will be justified in a death sentence is when an individual
continues to say "No" to God's gift of forgiveness and salvation
through Christ His Son. Continual
rejection of God is a sin.As that
choice is voiced throughout that person's life and he continues to voice it
through his freedom to do so until he dies, he will face The God, who is a
Sovereign God, and at that time a God of Judgment who has already warned us in
advance, "The wages of sin is death."